Advertisement

Bounded Ontological Consistency for Scalable Dynamic Knowledge Infrastructures

  • Maciej Zurawski
  • Alan Smaill
  • Dave Robertson
Conference paper
  • 623 Downloads
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5367)

Abstract

Both semantic web applications and individuals are in need of knowledge infrastructures that can be used in dynamic and distributed environments where different autonomous entities create knowledge and build their own view of a domain. Our framework represents this using evolving simple contextual ontologies and mappings between them, at the same time as incremental logical coherence is maintained. The definition of semantic autonomy includes these aspects. Our earlier research has shown that a knowledge infrastructure can have semantic autonomy that maintains global consistency, if the knowledge representation is kept simple. We generalize that research by investigating what happens if the consistency of a knowledge infrastructure is bounded 1) within certain regions called spheres of consistency, and 2) by allowing a limited variable degree of inconsistency. Our experiments show that a phase transition can occur in this kind of system, beyond which constant-time and constant-memory complexity is approached.

Keywords

Semantic autonomy ontology evolution ontology management bounded consistency rule-based process modelling phase transition 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Zurawski, M.: Towards a context-sensitive distributed knowledge management system for the knowledge organization. In: Workshop on Knowledge Management and the Semantic Web, 14th International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management (EKAW 2004), UK (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Robertson, D.: Multi-agent Coordination as Distributed Logic Programming. In: Demoen, B., Lifschitz, V. (eds.) ICLP 2004. LNCS, vol. 3132, pp. 416–430. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zurawski, M.: Distributed multi-contextual ontology evolution – A step towards semantic autonomy. In: Staab, S., Svátek, V. (eds.) EKAW 2006. LNCS, vol. 4248, pp. 198–213. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zurawski, M.: Reasoning about multi-contextual ontology evolution. In: The First International Workshop on Context and Ontologies: Theories, Practice and Applications, The Twentieth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 2005), Pittsburgh, PA, USA, July 9-13 (2005)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bouquet, P., Giunchiglia, F., van Harmelen, F., Serafini, L., Stuckenschmidt, H.: C-OWL: Contextualizing Ontologies. In: Sekara, K., Mylopoulis, J. (eds.) Proceedings of the Second International Semantic Web Conference. LNCS, pp. 164–179. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Haase, P., Stojanovic, L.: Consistent evolution of OWL ontologies. In: Gómez-Pérez, A., Euzenat, J. (eds.) ESWC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3532, pp. 182–197. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ma, Y., Qi, G., Hitzler, P., Lin, Z.: An algorithm for computing inconsistency measurement by paraconsistent semantics. In: Mellouli, K. (ed.) ECSQARU 2007. LNCS, vol. 4724, pp. 91–102. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zhao, Y., Wang, K., Topor, R., Pan, J.Z., Giunchiglia, F.: Semantic cooperation and knowledge reuse by using autonomous ontologies. In: Aberer, K., Choi, K.-S., Noy, N., Allemang, D., Lee, K.-I., Nixon, L., Golbeck, J., Mika, P., Maynard, D., Mizoguchi, R., Schreiber, G., Cudré-Mauroux, P. (eds.) ASWC 2007 and ISWC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4825, pp. 666–679. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wang, Y., Bao, J., Haase, P., Qi, G.: Evaluating Formalisms for Modular Ontologies in Distributed Information Systems. In: Marchiori, M., Pan, J.Z., Marie, C.d.S. (eds.) RR 2007. LNCS, vol. 4524, pp. 178–193. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Froehner, T., Nickles, M., Weiß, G.: Towards modeling the social layer of emergent knowledge using open ontologies. In: ECAI Workshop on Agent-Mediated Knowledge Management (AMKM), pp. 10–19 (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Stojanovic, L., Schneider, J., Maedche, A., Libischer, S., Studer, R., Lumpp, T., Abecker, A., Breiter, G., Dinger, J.: The role of ontologies in autonomic computing systems. IBM Systems Journal 43(3), 598–616 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maciej Zurawski
    • 1
  • Alan Smaill
    • 1
  • Dave Robertson
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Intelligent Systems and their Applications (CISA), School of InformaticsUniversity of Edinburgh, Informatics ForumEdinburghScotland

Personalised recommendations